RUSSIA AND CZECHOSLOVAKIA. (Hansard, 14 November 1938)

§ Mr. Arthur Henderson
I desire to bring to the notice of the House a statement recently made by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. I quote from the "Times" of lath October to this effect: Lord Winterton, speaking at Shoreham, said Russia did not offer help in the Czechoslovakian crisis, but only made very vague promises owing to her military weakness. In view of the Treaty obligations of the Soviet Government towards Czechoslovakia to go to her assistance if attacked, this statement, if true, would constitute a very grave reflection upon the Soviet Government, more especially in view of the tragic fate which has, in fact, overtaken unhappy Czechoslovakia. But what are the facts? Let me deal with them, if I may, in chronological order. On 8th September, it has been stated, the Russian Ambassador saw the Foreign Secretary and informed him that Russia was prepared to implement her obligations to Czechoslovakia. Secondly, I quote from the "Times" of 13th September, from its correspondent at Geneva: An exchange of views took place between the Russian and Rumanian Delegations, in which it was agreed that in the case of an aggression against Czechoslovakia neither country would remain neutral. The "Times" of 26th September gave an account of the gathering of large Russian forces on the Polish frontier. It gave a number of figures: 330,000 to 350,000 infantry, 50,000 cavalry, 3,000 aeroplanes, 2,000 tanks. Fourthly, the "Times" published on 21st September an extract from a speech delivered by M. Litvinoff, the Russian Foreign Minister, at the League of Nations at Geneva, in which he said: A few days ago, before he had left for Geneva, the French Government had inquired about the attitude of the Soviet Government 649 in the event of an attack on Czechoslovakia. He had replied unambiguously that they intended to fulfil their obligations under the Pact and together with France to afford assistance to Czechoslovakia by the ways open to them,"— and this is important— and that their War Department was ready immediately to participate in a conference with the representatives of the French and Czechoslovakian War Departments to discuss the measures appropriate to the moment. If these statements by the representative of the Soviet Government are not sufficient to convince hon. Members of the intentions and policy of the Russian Government with regard to Czechoslovakia, let me quote from the authoritative statement which was published in London on 26th September, and which I assume would not be repudiated by His Majesty's Government: If in spite of all efforts made by the British Prime Minister a German attack is made upon Czechoslovakia the immediate result must be that France will be bound to come to her assistance and Great Britain and Russia will certainly stand by France. I suggest that this statement constitutes an important commentary on the statement of the Chancellor of the Duchy, because if it were true that Russia had not offered help in the Czechoslovakian crisis then the British Government itself would have been guilty of deliberately misleading pubic opinion when they stated that Russia would certainly stand by France.
The next step was the visit of the Russian Ambassador to the Foreign Office on 11th October. We do not know what took place between the Foreign Secretary and the Russian Ambassador. All that we have is a written reply by the Prime Minister stating: I hope that any misunderstandings that may have arisen have now been cleared up."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 3rd November, 1938; col. 378, Vol. 340.] That reply is wholly insufficient, because it gives no indication whatsoever of the view that is taken by His Majesty's Government in relation to the statement of the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.
I suggest that the House is entitled to know, first, are these allegations true in the view of His Majesty's Government? If they are true, we ought to be told so by the Prime Minister, and, I hope, given the reasons why the Government accept the Chancellor's view. If, on the other hand, the statements are untrue and it is 650 not the view of His Majesty's Government that Russia was not prepared to fulfil her obligations to Czechoslovakia, I hope that the Prime Minister will publicly dissociate His Majesty's Government from such a statement. The statement was made publicly by a British Cabinet Minister. The right hon. Gentleman is a member of the Cabinet and as such his views were broadcast throughout the world and published in the newspapers of every country and, I have no doubt, more especially in Germany and Italy. I think, therefore, that it is only fair and just to the Soviet Government that those statements, if they be untrue, should be publicly withdrawn.
Whatever may be the view of His Majesty's Government with regard to the political complexion of the Soviet Government, that Government represents a great nation of 160,000,000 people, a nation which has never failed to display the greatest courage in time of war and, what is even more important to some of us, a nation and Government which with all its failings, has remained, consistently, a loyal member of the League of Nations. I hope, if the Chancellor will frankly admit that he has been guilty of an indiscretion, that he will do the right thing by withdrawing and apologising to the Russian Government. If he is not prepared to do that, I suggest and submit to the House that in any event it is vitally important that this matter should be cleared up one way or the other.

§ The Prime Minister
I am at a loss to know what the purpose of the hon. Member is in raising this matter on the Adjournment. I have not noticed, in my observations of the hon. Member's conduct in the past, that it has been his habit to try to make trouble between this Government and the Government of any other country with which we are in friendly relations, and I cannot believe that that is his intention on this occasion; but I find it very difficult to see what other purpose there is in raising this matter now.
Let me recall what the facts were. My Noble Friend made a speech, in the course of which he said that Russia had not offered specific military assistance to the Czechoslovakian Government, and thereupon the Russian Ambassador called next day at the Foreign Office in order 651 to make a protest at this remark of my Noble Friend's, which he considered was not in accord with the official statement made by the Soviet representative. The official statement, which is the only official information we have from the Soviet side, was the statement of M. Litvinoff at the League Assembly on 21st September. He said: With regard to Czechoslovakia, his Government's position was clear. They had informed the French and Czechoslovak Governments that they were ready to give all possible help if France came to the assistance of Czechoslovakia and that their general staff were ready to take part in military consultations with those responsible in Czechoslovakia and France. Their attitude was in full accord with the spirit of the Covenant and the Kellogg Pact. That was the statement of M. Litvinoff, and the House can judge how far my Noble Friend was justified in saying that that was not a specific statement of what they were going to do.
I would refer also to the interview of the Russian Ambassador with my Noble Friend the Foreign Secretary. My Noble Friend said to M. Maisky that he had not yet had an opportunity of consulting the Chancellor of the Duchy on the matter, but, he added, it was quite inevitable that at a time of crisis many rumours should be in circulation, and he personally thought there was little profit in recriminations on one side or the other upon events that were now past history. He further said that he hoped, however, that our disagreement on the action that was taken at Munich would not have the effect of impairing the relations existing between our two Governments.
That was what my Noble Friend said to the Russian Ambassador, but he promised the Ambassador that he would call the Chancellor's attention to the protest that he had made. He did so, and thereupon my Noble Friend the Chancellor had an interview with M. Maisky, in which he said frankly to him that he thought it had been unfortunate that he had, upon a public platform, commented upon the action of a friendly Government. But he added that he wanted to make it plain that he himself, in common with all members of the Government, desired to preserve the most friendly relations with Russia. After that, my Noble 652 Friend had a further friendly conversation with the Russian Ambassador, and understood from him that he now considered the incident between them closed. If the representative of the Russian Government considers the incident closed, and feels that he has no longer any reason to doubt the desire of the Government to maintain the most friendly relations with his country, I really think it is a great pity that we should try and repeat any cause of difference or misunderstanding that may have taken place. Let us consider this incident closed, as the Russian Government consider it closed, and say no more about it.

§ Mr. Dalton
I am afraid my hon. Friends will not feel that the Prime Minister has dealt very adequately with the question raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Kingswinford (Mr. A. Henderson). I shall speak very briefly, because I feel it is due to the House that the Chancellor should have the opportunity of saying a word or two. The plain truth is that the Chancellor of the Duchy made a statement, speaking as a Member of the Cabinet, regarding the attitude of a foreign Government with whom we are in friendly relations, which led the representative of that Government in London to make a formal protest to the Foreign Office. The right hon. Gentleman, whatever he may have said privately to M. Maisky—which, if I may say so, is not evidence in this House—has hitherto failed to retract the statement which he made, and which, we submit, is in conflict with the facts. What did the right hon. Gentleman say? On the first occasion he said that Russia did not offer help in the Czechoslovak crisis, but only made very vague promises, owing to her military weakness. My hon. Friend has submitted that no evidence has been produced in support of that statement—and that, in fact, it is contrary to the facts. I hope the Chancellor of the Duchy will himself now rise in his place and admit that the statement he made was based on a misunderstanding of the facts, and that he regrets that he so spoke as to cause the representative of a friendly Power to make a formal protest at the Foreign Office.

§ The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Earl Winterton)
I rise because the hon. Gentleman has, if I may so, quite courteously and in proper accord with the traditions and Rules of the House, asked me to make a statement. I am indebted to the Prime Minister, who has given a complete and exact account of the interview between the Russian Ambassador and myself, which I believed, and I have reason to think the Russian Ambassador believed, was an end of this 654 question. The Russian Ambassador was good enough to say that the incident was closed, and I cannot think it would be in the public interest to add anything or subtract anything from the statement I made on that occasion.